« On the lighter side, sort of | Main | The importance of counsel, and the challenges of judging it »
January 19, 2005
Booker internets resources and commentary
I have decided to use "internets," a term perhaps coined by President Bush, to describe collectively materials on traditional websites and on blogs. And the internets have a lot to offer of late on the Booker front:
WEBSITES
- The website Watching Justice has this Booker page with links to a few newspaper editorials (more of which I linked here), and also links to various official comments about and resources on the decision.
- The November Coalition has this updated page of Booker/Blakely materials.
- FAMM appears to have updated its Booker materials available here.
BLOGS
- I have just discovered the Ninth Circuit Blog run by a group of top-notch federal defenders of the Ninth Circuit. This blog already has ten very detailed posts about Booker litigation issues which should be of special interest to defense attorneys. (The blog has also allowed me to "out" FPD Paul Rashkind as having a role in this blog which used to mock my Booker predictions.)
- Old favorites, the Blakely Blog and INCourts are back in action, with the former here doing a Tuesday review of federal Booker stories, and the latter here catching up on the Indiana state Blakely stories.
January 19, 2005 at 02:14 AM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200d8343985fe53ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Booker internets resources and commentary:
Comments
I confess. Do I get points for acceptance of responsibility under an advisory system of guidelines? I clearly cannot get credit for cooperation since few of my A. Non Emus predictions about Booker were accurate. You were - and are - a good sport. Thanks for devoting the time and thinking that makes your blog so interesting.
P.S. Also check out other federal defender circuit blogs, under the link "D-Web Law Blogs," such as defensenewsletter.blogspot.com. All circuits should be up and running soon.
P.P.S. Would you mind predicting that we'll never understand what a patently unreasonable sentence is - so we may someday devine the meaning of the last sentence of the Breyer majority decision.
Posted by: Paul Rashkind | Jan 19, 2005 2:25:15 PM
I respectfully argue you get the AOR points (two or three, depending upon the appropriate USSG Manual per Sec 1B1.11). It seems fundamental fairness arguments need this: the entire Guidelines analysis must happen as if Booker never dropped, or the advisory USSG calculation is flawed as a statutory sentencing factor under 18 USC 3553(a).
Fundamental fairness hopefully requires every defendant’s advisory USSG application to reflect exactly the sentencing range a Judge would have contemplated pre-Booker. That "old" calculation then gets mitigated in a full defense sentencing report, as now allowed.
Unless the appropriate USSG Manual is applied in full, including departure limitations, it seems the Court does not have a true USSG advisement with which to render a full 3553(a) analysis.
The "advisory" nature of the Guidelines comes not just from the two stricken subsections, but also from unlimited application of other sentencing statutes.
Posted by: Jay H | Jan 19, 2005 11:56:51 PM